French Patriot

You are the sick one if you do not speak against bad laws. We have been adjusting, reversing and improving our laws forever because people spoke out against bad laws. You would have women shut up when there were laws preventing them from voting and would also not speak up againt anti-gay laws. You might want to start thinking before I let my bully attitude start talking about your I Q. Regards DL

Please read my last. The speech against slavery, even to the point of inciting violence, I think, was justified even though it did harm to the slave owning South and it's people. That was indeed bringing harm to the society in the South. That may not be the type of harm you meant. Regards DL

We are on the same page buddy. A slight caveat to your incitement to violence. History shows that even that might pass. Here I am thinking of the hate speech that may well have included violence before the North warred against the slavery and slave ownership of the South in the U.S. The same goes for the hate speech against Germany before we entered WWII. Regards DL

Is hate good? Should we allow the censorship of hate speech? 1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good. Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth. God seems to think correcting hateful thoughts or actions is good and correction often times includes showing hate for what is though or done. I have tested the notions of and concepts of hate and love and find both to be quite useful. There is a time to love and a time to hate even in these days where Google and others who control the net are actively censoring us? Should we allow ourselves to hate and speak against those things that deserve to be hated or should we allow the censors to muzzle us? Are censors coming to take away our freedom of speech if it has a hate component? "First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I'm not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I'm not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I'm not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me." – Pastor Father Niemoller (1946)” "Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime." - Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart Does hate serve a good purpose for us? For evil to grow, all good people who know what to hate need do is allow censorship and the end of freedom of speech. Regards DL

Given that every church and preacher have their own views, I think my best response here would be to ask you to just go to a Unitarian site and ask them that question. Religions are changing view quickly today due to pressure from the reducing numbers of church goers. So many tribes chasing a dwindling amount of funds to do their adherents out of who basically pay to be lied to about Gods that no one can know anything about. Gnostic Christians can and do know their God as it is themselves. Regards DL

The Trinity concept was only accepted after Constantine forced the Christians to vote it into place, what, 300 years after Jesus dies. It took threats of death to get his way. It is a long story but if you have the time. Originally Posted by animefan48 Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies. Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity) But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.) http://home.pacific.net.au/~amaxwell/bdigest/bd12bbs.tx Even a Trinitarian scholar admits the Earliest & Original beliefs were NOT Trinitarian! The trinity formulation is a later corruption away from the earliest & original beliefs! "It must be admitted by everyone who has the rudiments of an historical sense that the doctrine of the Trinity, as a doctrine, formed no part of the original message. St Paul knew it not, and would have been unable to understand the meaning of the terms used in the theological formula on which the Church ultimately agreed". Dr. W R Matthews, Dean of St Paul's Cathedral, "God in Christian Thought and Experience", p.180 "In order to understand the doctrine of the Trinity it is necessary to understand that the doctrine is a development, and why it developed. ... It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament". R Hanson: "Reasonable Belief, A survey of the Christian Faith, p.171-173, 1980 The doctrine of the Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament. New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. XIV, p. 306. "The formulation `One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective" New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299. "The formulation `One God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective" (New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, Vol. 14, p. 299). "Fourth-century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary a deviation from this teaching" (The Encyclopedia Americana, p. 1956, p. 2941). Was Jesus God to Paul and other early Christians? No. . . . . (Source: How the Bible became the Bible by Donald L. O'Dell - ISBN 0-7414-2993-4 Published by INFINITY Publishing.com) Constantine's Victory Arch says it all. http://www.simchajtv.com/movie-secrets-of-christianity-selling-christianity/ Regards DL

Well put, but Christians sure quote the O. T. when they want to reduce women and gays to second class citizens with their vile homophobia and misogyny. It is not surprising that the Christian clergy lie like crazy to have people follow Jesus instead of the prick of a Father, who they tied Jesus to with their idiotic Trinity concept. Regards DL

I am pro choice. Freedom of association trumps a ministers duties if we are to promote voting by conscience instead of by party line. We saw, with Trump, what voting the tribal line instead of by conscience does to a party. Yuk. Regards DL

Mais oui mon ami. It is the intelligent view. In fact there would only be two dogs as they were too stupid to even know to reproduce. None of us would be here. The Jews and Gnostic Christians were correct. So are you. Regards DL

U C 20/20. That is why the Jews and us Gnostic Christians see Eden as where man was elevated. Not where we fell. That is the Christians enhancing their misogynous potential with false guilt. Their specialty. Regards DL

Would Jesus condemn or condone Yahweh and his crimes against humanity? The good Jesus would likely condemn while the less moral and good Jesus that most follow might not. A number of his policies have been found wanting, --- in moral terms. Not surprising that given time and language. Dogma says that Jesus ascended to heaven and his rightful place as judge of the universe at Yahweh’s right hand. The pure hand says tradition. Would Jesus dethrone Yahweh for the insane genocidal example he shows for a God, or would Jesus somehow justify what Yahweh, and himself to Trinitarians, did. Would he say that genocide was good? Heaven forbid. Condemn or Condone? I say Jesus would condemn. What say you my moral friends? https://vimeo.com/7038401 Regards DL

Where they will apply their better and more flexible thinking. Win, Win. Win. If we were not so stupid, we could change that tomorrow but we are just to stupid to take advantage of what we know is profitable, en masse. We will not organize in a common demography. Regards DL

The young are more intelligent and flexible in their thinking than their parents. A good thing for social progress that. Regards DL

On student- teacher. Jesus said, seek God. He did not say let God seek you. On Christianity. I do not ignore the church as it is evil in it's present form. I wish to reform it and make it more like Gnostic Christianity which is a much better form. Note how Christianity is trying to take God out of man while we want to put God back in man where he belongs, given that we create all the Gods. Regards DL

Recruit? Students seek the teacher. The teacher does not chase down students. Gnostic Christianity is a religion of free thinking esoteric ecumenists and naturalists. It is a good man ideology that has no need of a savior or hero as we do not see a God, if he exists, as loser enough to need to condemn his creations then stupidly turn around and die to forgive it instead of just forgiving it outright. The only salvation we seek is from such stupid and immoral thinking. The archetypal Jesus we know and follow is not the immoral and vile Roman creation that the church sells. He is there to slave men to religions and governments while the Jesus Gnostic Christians try to emulate is there to free us from religions and governments and create moral men instead of immoral children who are forever looking to others to do their thinking for them. I am likely the worst teacher for Gnostic Christianity due to my passion for truth and freedom and disrespect for the vile and immoral mainstream religions but I am what I am. Being French does not help. We are passionate by nature. To be a Gnostic Christian you have to both want to be the best possible person you can be. The elevated Cathars called themselves Parfait, and you also have to have the desire to bring the immoral and vile mainstream religions to heel as we also live by the notion that for evil to grow, all good people need do is nothing. Oop. This is more than one chapter. Part of being a lousy teacher I guess. Then again, not having much of a formal education and being self taught, I am happy to be able to stich more than 5 words together. Regards DL .

If read literally, you are bang on. If you want to get the wisdom out of the bible you have to go into allegory and esoteric mystical thinking and recognize how smart the ancients were before Christianity spoiled the soup with literal reading. Evolution has designed us to be both good and evil from our human POV and we must embrace the fact that we must sin in order to evolve. I have no problem with evil and neither does nature. Cooperation is good, competition is evil from the losers POV. We default to good, but use evil as a part of our growth, in terms of evolution. We would have it no other way, or we would go extinct. Perhaps Martin Luther recognized that and said it this way. “Be a sinner and sin strongly, but more strongly have faith and rejoice in Christ.” Martin Luther Regards DL

Neither would I if it did. If there was anything supernatural or magic in Gnostic Christianity, I would never have taken on the label. I took it on because I saw that the only good Christian was a Gnostic Christian. That has been the case from the tome Christianity usurped what I think were close to original Gnostic Christian holy books from the time we called ourselves Chrestians. Unfortunately this far up the time line and lacking original text, I may never be able to prove it. Do try to remember that we lost the God wars and the Christians lied a lot about what we believed. This link speaks too that. Regards DL

That rule was ancient before Christianity used it. If Christianity lived by it, then the word Inquisition would not exist. The only good Christian is a Gnostic Christian. Regards DL

I agree with your view of Jesus. So does Gnostic Christianity. That Jesus had no supernatural belief in his philosophy/ideology. Neither does Gnostic Christianity. Jesus was his own man and his own God and so are we. Modern Gnostic Christians name our God "I am", and yes, we do mean ourselves. You are your controller. I am mine. You represent and present whatever mind picture you have of your God or ideal human, and so do I. The name "I Am" you might see as meaning something like, --- I think I have grown up thanks to having forced my apotheosis through Gnosis and meditation. In Gnostic Christianity, we follow the Christian tradition that lazy Christians have forgotten that they are to do. That is, become brethren to Jesus. That is why some say that the only good Christian is a Gnostic Christian. Here is the real way Jesus taught. Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Allan Watts explain those quotes in detail. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesfXXw&feature=player_embedded Joseph Campbell shows the same esoteric ecumenist idea in this link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGx4IlppSgU The bible just plainly says to put away the things of children. The supernatural. I urge you to also see that Freke link above. Regards DL

Most people just inherit their traditional family Gods. Gnostic Christians choose to be so which shows they have a seeker's mind set and not an idol worshiping mind set. It is unfortunate that I do not have a local church or I would break my loner ways and support it. Toronto is coming along but it is not quite there yet and still too far from Ottawa for me to make that trip regularly. With most revealed religions on the wane, and with more atheists starting to replace them, and given the vile reputation that mainstream religions are fostering, there might never be a Gnostic church in my area. The Gnostic Christian doctrine and ideology is hard to beat though so time will tell. Regards DL

That would be from our myths. Not our beliefs. Our myths where written to put against the Christian myths when we all knew that all the Gods were myths. Have a look at how intelligently people sought the best rules and laws to live by before foolish literal reading of myths began. http://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2 This next link speaks of the aftermath. Most of what you will hear of Gnostic Christianity are distortions. We lost the God wars and the winners wrote the history to suit their vile agenda. Here is how well we were doing before the Inquisitions and the end of freedom of religions imposed by Christianity. Regards DL

Actually, no. I know enough of them, as well as all the mainstream supernaturally based religions, to disrespect them all. The knowledge and wisdom people centered religions are the only ones I favor. They do not need to lie to their adherents like the supernaturally based religions. Regards DL

I feel the same way on organized religions. I do see some value in local churches thanks to the good social work that some do but to kowtow to some far away regime is foolish. All they want is cash and slaved adherents as is quite apparent with the Popes latest appeal for adherents and their cash. Regards DL

Credit earned is credit due buddy. Take a bow. In morality, science helps us understand why we must sin to survive. Apologies for the length of what follow. Eve was correct in eating of the tree of knowledge and rejecting God. It was God's plan from the beginning to have Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the bible says that Jesus "was crucified from the foundations of the Earth," that is to say, God planned to crucify Jesus as atonement for sin before he even created human beings or God damned sin. 1Peter 1:20 0 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. This indicates that Jesus had no choice. If God had not intended humans to sin from the beginning, why did he build into the Creation this "solution" for sin? Why create a solution for a problem you do not anticipate? God knew that the moment he said "don't eat from that tree," the die was cast. The eating was inevitable. Eve was merely following the plan. This then begs the question. What kind of God would plan and execute the murder of his own son when there was absolutely no need to? Only an insane and immoral God. That’s who. The cornerstone of Christianity is human sacrifice, thus showing it‘s immorality. One of Christianity's highest form of immorality is what they have done to women. They have denied them equality and subjugated them to men. ------------------------ Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by whipping out their favorite "free will!", or “ it’s all man’s fault”. That is "God gave us free will and it was our free willed choices that caused our fall. Hence God is not blameworthy." But this simply avoids God's culpability as the author of Human Nature. Free will is only the ability to choose. It is not an explanation why anyone would want to choose "A" or "B" (bad or good action). An explanation for why Eve would even have the nature of "being vulnerable to being easily swayed by a serpent" and "desiring to eat a forbidden fruit" must lie in the nature God gave Eve in the first place. Hence God is culpable for deliberately making humans with a nature-inclined-to-fall, and "free will" means nothing as a response to this problem. If all sin by nature, then the sin nature is dominant. If not, we would have at least some who would not sin. That being the case, for God to punish us for following the instincts and natures he put in us would be quite wrong. Psalm 51:5 "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." Having said the above for the God that I do not believe in, I am a Gnostic Christian naturalist, let me tell you that evil is all human generated. Evil is our responsibility. Much has been written to explain what I see as a natural part of evolution. Consider. First, let us eliminate what some see as evil. Natural disasters. These are unthinking occurrences and are neither good nor evil. There is no intent to do evil even as victims are created. Evil then is only human to human. As evolving creatures, all we ever do, and ever can do, is compete or cooperate. Cooperation we would see as good as there are no victims created. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim. We all are either cooperating, doing good, or competing, doing evil at all times. Without us doing some of both, we would likely go extinct. This, to me, explains why there is evil in the world quite well. Be you a believer in nature, evolution or God, we should all see that what Christians see as something to blame, evil, we should see that what we have, competition, deserves a huge thanks for being available to us. There is no conflict between nature and God on this issue. This is how things are and should be. We all must do what some will think is evil as we compete and create losers to this competition. ----------------------- Evolutionary theology. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXOvYn1OAL0&list=UUDXjzOeZRqLxhYaaEhWLb_A&index=9 J W is indeed Jehovah Witness. They reproduced for sure, but the J W analogy is a good one and if God had not locked away the tree of life, A & E would not have died. A shame you do not recognize that as murder as that is what it is for the J W withhold blood. Only a double moral standard would have us condemn man for that while not condemning God for the same basic act. Regards DL

The other speaks to punishment for A & E. This one has other issues. I hear you. It starts to sound like a set up to me as well. No to all ?s and I agree with the rest. I do not agree with this bit. I agree that as natural animals we do indeed have the ability to sin. I do not think we can evolve properly without sinning, in the sense that we must compete and thus create victims/losers who would think evil has befallen them. But spiritually and intellectually, without the knowledge of good and evil, we would not have a moral sense and would be legally under the rule of mens rea which states that without evil intent, no one can be convicted of a crime/sin. Think of the J W blood transfusion trials where parents were charged with murder when they denied blood transfusions to their children who died from that neglect. They were found guilty. In the bible, God is shown to also kill A & E by neglect when he to denied his new children what would have kept them alive. The tree of life is analogous in this cas to the J W blood transfusion. Do you think that the term murder by neglect applies here to God? Regards DL P.S. Even if you do not agree, good to meet a thinking mind.